Canada’s Real Estate Market Is a Giant Pyramid Scheme(survivingtomorrow.org)
survivingtomorrow.org
Canada’s Real Estate Market Is a Giant Pyramid Scheme
https://survivingtomorrow.org/canadas-real-estate-market-is-a-giant-pyramid-scheme-832ea0364c68
85 comments
> I’m making more money sitting in this house than I do at my well paid tech job.
This echoes what I’ve been told. Founders at a startup I spoke to were from Switzerland and Canada. Tried raising capital in Toronto (where Canadian finance is happening) and Vancouver and the response they got was lackluster.
Investors basically wanted to match the returns they would get simply by parking their money in real estate, as well as the (non-existent) risk profile. This was especially true in Vancouver where they actually had someone rescheduling at the last minute because he was involved in a bidding war for some property in partnership with a foreign buyer.
So they ended up coming down to the Bay to get funding. I assume most of the owners are here in America now (they are still quite early stage, at least, the cofounders are and so are most employees).
This echoes what I’ve been told. Founders at a startup I spoke to were from Switzerland and Canada. Tried raising capital in Toronto (where Canadian finance is happening) and Vancouver and the response they got was lackluster.
Investors basically wanted to match the returns they would get simply by parking their money in real estate, as well as the (non-existent) risk profile. This was especially true in Vancouver where they actually had someone rescheduling at the last minute because he was involved in a bidding war for some property in partnership with a foreign buyer.
So they ended up coming down to the Bay to get funding. I assume most of the owners are here in America now (they are still quite early stage, at least, the cofounders are and so are most employees).
Well, don't discount the fact that Canadian investors are strongly against any sort of tech investment and prefer natural resources or banking, which is the historical low-risk investments here.
Tech has always been a uphill battle in Canada.
Tech has always been a uphill battle in Canada.
Is anything being done to address this?
No, I think this is just the nature of Canadian investors - they are much more risk-adverse and don't seem to have the stomach for the "swing for the fences" angel investment that US investors have. It's cultural.
A relatively small number of multi-unit investors can impact the market when combined with fewer sellers (low supply). It drives the real buyers like a panicked herd into the limited supply.
How much of that is completely self-imposed with out of control immigration quotas and a lax policy around foreign money laundering?
I wonder which party is supporting these measures and why.
I wonder which party is supporting these measures and why.
During COVID, which has been the period with the highest house growth across all markets, I understand there has been a negligible amount of immigration.
The foreign money laundering has been known for 20 years and none of the major political parties has done anything to slow it.
The foreign money laundering has been known for 20 years and none of the major political parties has done anything to slow it.
> I understand there has been a negligible amount of immigration.
What matters is foreign capital flow. Companies and “convenience passport” holders can still purchase on behalf of someone else.
What matters is foreign capital flow. Companies and “convenience passport” holders can still purchase on behalf of someone else.
Canada has a “100 million by 2100” goal with absolutely no policies on providing infrastructure to meet that goal.
Canada doesn't have such a plan. One "charity" group is trying to promote it.
Thank you for the correction. It's not official policy. Just an idea being pushed by a former PM.
[deleted]
In r/Canada every day there is a similar post (though usually from mainstream news outlets) about how housing is broken.
And every day it gets several hundred replies. The despair is real.
Very depressing as my family is in Canada and I consider moving back, except my cost of living will be comparable (NYC), and my salary takes a 50% cut and becomes the absolute ceiling (in NYC I can still double up). And aside from downtown Toronto, the GTA is a suburban wasteland.
Very depressing as my family is in Canada and I consider moving back, except my cost of living will be comparable (NYC), and my salary takes a 50% cut and becomes the absolute ceiling (in NYC I can still double up). And aside from downtown Toronto, the GTA is a suburban wasteland.
> and my salary takes a 50% cut
Why would you do that?
Why would you do that?
I haven't yet. But it would be to live among the people I love the most.
Your pay shouldn't change. Same contribution, same value added.
Wouldn't that be nice.
Yogi Berra famously said something like "Nobody goes to that restaurant anymore, it's always too crowded".
It takes similar logic to claim there's a mass migration away from places with high housing prices.
Prices are high because more people want to live there than want to leave.
If more people wanted to leave, prices would fall.
That's not a pyramid scheme, it's supply and demand.
It takes similar logic to claim there's a mass migration away from places with high housing prices.
Prices are high because more people want to live there than want to leave.
If more people wanted to leave, prices would fall.
That's not a pyramid scheme, it's supply and demand.
> Prices are high because more people want to live there than want to leave
Or it could be super-low interest rates and banks giving mortgages to every stripper and then flogging them off to clueless investirs as AAA-rated securities like they did before 2008.
Or it could be because we allow foreign 'investors' to launder drug-money, blood-money ads tax-avoidance money by buying luxury apartments by the dozens and leaving them empty and unused.
Or it could be outright collusion and fraud by developers or market makers. Or a hubdred other things economists write papers about - beloved 'free market' is more than one equasion.
Or it could be super-low interest rates and banks giving mortgages to every stripper and then flogging them off to clueless investirs as AAA-rated securities like they did before 2008.
Or it could be because we allow foreign 'investors' to launder drug-money, blood-money ads tax-avoidance money by buying luxury apartments by the dozens and leaving them empty and unused.
Or it could be outright collusion and fraud by developers or market makers. Or a hubdred other things economists write papers about - beloved 'free market' is more than one equasion.
The reality is that's not happening today, the creditworthiness of borrowers in 2021 was higher than it's ever been. Demand is completely outstripping supply right now.
Source re creditworthiness? I’ve seen headlines stating the indebtedness of Canadians relative to income has never been higher.
Both things are happening. Credit scores have improved during the pandemic. Less missed payments, less spending (maybe because people are home more), plus more government assistance.
While credit cards and credit lines are doing better, mortgages have increased, causing debt to income to be very high.
While credit cards and credit lines are doing better, mortgages have increased, causing debt to income to be very high.
> banks giving mortgages to every stripper
Wh...what is this? Do strippers not deserve mortgages? What a weirdly specific example.
Wh...what is this? Do strippers not deserve mortgages? What a weirdly specific example.
There's a famous scene in the movie "The Big Short" where a character is talking to a stripper about her investment properties. The movie is about the 2008 housing bubble.
As cash-rich contractors, they were lucrative customers for expensive subprime adjustable-rate mortgages once underwriters stopped verifying steady employment income.
somewhat NSFW: https://youtu.be/MesrrYyuoa4?t=181
somewhat NSFW: https://youtu.be/MesrrYyuoa4?t=181
Not OP, but generally banks look at stability of income and I think the implication here, as in the 2008 financial crisis, is that strippers and other grey area employees don’t have as reliable income given the cash payments (and likely lack of fully reporting income to the government).
You can manufacture demand with propaganda and money laundering. Unlike the US which is driven by industry, Canada's real estate market is not
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30208224
[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16417623
[3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18319568
[4] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30397365
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30208224
[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16417623
[3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18319568
[4] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30397365
[deleted]
While I appreciate the comparisons, a fairer comparison would be to compare expensive Canadian cities to expensive American cities.
A nice condo in SF or NYC is also likely to get you that mansion in Georgia.
A nice condo in SF or NYC is also likely to get you that mansion in Georgia.
There is no apples to apples comparison in the first place.
Most of Canada is sparsely inhabited or uninhabitable. Unlike the US, there are far fewer places to live besides the major metro areas.
SF and NYC are not good comparisons either. Yes, they are expensive and 90%+ of the country could never afford to live there—that part is the same—but Americans have so many more options. There are small- and medium-sized cities all over the US.
Most of Canada is sparsely inhabited or uninhabitable. Unlike the US, there are far fewer places to live besides the major metro areas.
SF and NYC are not good comparisons either. Yes, they are expensive and 90%+ of the country could never afford to live there—that part is the same—but Americans have so many more options. There are small- and medium-sized cities all over the US.
Exactly. Canada does not* have many cities and much of the nation has little to no infrastructure.
Even small towns are well >$600k for rundown detached houses here.
There's multiple considerations. For example. If you need access to quality healthcare for certain conditions, you'll need be limited in cities you can reside in/near.
Even small towns are well >$600k for rundown detached houses here.
There's multiple considerations. For example. If you need access to quality healthcare for certain conditions, you'll need be limited in cities you can reside in/near.
What is the difficulty in developing more housing in less populated regions of Canada? Cost of materials, permitting and regulations, uninhabitable climate?
All of the above, plus labour costs for building, lack of infrastructure, and most importantly, lack of an economy.
Even if someone can survive the isolation living in the north requires (and the $7 heads of lettuce) there often isn't many options for earning an income.
Even if someone can survive the isolation living in the north requires (and the $7 heads of lettuce) there often isn't many options for earning an income.
Remote towns have been stagnate or depopulating for decades. The problems for residents may be lack of services, high taxes, high energy costs, lack of opportunity, access to shipping, etc.
From the government's perspective. There are many factors for not building and improving remote towns. Some are: a) climate change (vehicles, heating, trucking and more) b) lack of infrastructure (gas, roads, railroads, healthcare) c) lack of budget (most of Federal revenues go to redistribution payments)
The biggest issue I've noticed in Canada is a lack of will. Ibn Khaldun noticed later in a nation, citizens view the function of government as a means to provide leisure. Western Civilization is obviously going through a time of major upheaval. The 1950s - 1990s were an aberration, I don't think we're going to see those standards of living in the future. We can't expect large scale shipping routes to remote locations, so people can live in detached housing. Future housing will likely be large scale, high density, low sqft apartments designed for maximum efficiency of energy and infrastructure.
My thoughts are the nation technically doesn't need many people living in rural areas. The collective pursuits will win over the individual in the future.
From the government's perspective. There are many factors for not building and improving remote towns. Some are: a) climate change (vehicles, heating, trucking and more) b) lack of infrastructure (gas, roads, railroads, healthcare) c) lack of budget (most of Federal revenues go to redistribution payments)
The biggest issue I've noticed in Canada is a lack of will. Ibn Khaldun noticed later in a nation, citizens view the function of government as a means to provide leisure. Western Civilization is obviously going through a time of major upheaval. The 1950s - 1990s were an aberration, I don't think we're going to see those standards of living in the future. We can't expect large scale shipping routes to remote locations, so people can live in detached housing. Future housing will likely be large scale, high density, low sqft apartments designed for maximum efficiency of energy and infrastructure.
My thoughts are the nation technically doesn't need many people living in rural areas. The collective pursuits will win over the individual in the future.
Before mass mechanization, we needed far more people to cut trees, mine nickel, or grow wheat. Now, we need far fewer people to do those things. But services like schools, banks, and hospitals have need certain levels of population to fund themselves and scale. These forces are the effects of capital, technology, and demographics, not will.
It's many factors. However, the inability to create new cities and infrastructure can be overcome with will.
Now, whether we need new cities is a separate question.
In Canada where taxation and housing is expensive, the complaint has been that fertile landed is being used for urban sprawl.
One potential solution, that's rarely discussed, is to build cities in the North adjacent to large bodies of water. With access to shipping routes, lower taxation and superior infrastructure to make up for the adverse affects of weather.
You may argue the economic incentives and capital aren't there. I'd argue there's a massive misallocation of capital and the economy is fundamentally broken, but that'd be a lengthy discussion.
Now, whether we need new cities is a separate question.
In Canada where taxation and housing is expensive, the complaint has been that fertile landed is being used for urban sprawl.
One potential solution, that's rarely discussed, is to build cities in the North adjacent to large bodies of water. With access to shipping routes, lower taxation and superior infrastructure to make up for the adverse affects of weather.
You may argue the economic incentives and capital aren't there. I'd argue there's a massive misallocation of capital and the economy is fundamentally broken, but that'd be a lengthy discussion.
How to do you have lower taxation when your costs (heating, food, labour, transportation, construction materials) are all higher? The north doesn't even have permanent roads, and building those would cost billions of dollars and zillions every year as the frost destroys them. Ask the Soviet Union if profitably settling the north is a mere matter of will.
The easy way is to provide dirty water, shabby schools, and expensive food, but we do that already and people aren't exactly flocking north.
The easy way is to provide dirty water, shabby schools, and expensive food, but we do that already and people aren't exactly flocking north.
Nobody wants to live there. Canada has plenty of cheaper places like Calgary and Edmonton and Regina, but few move.
All of the above plus add on the fact that much of what seems like "empty land" on map is not actually viable in any way for housing development.
British Columbia is absolutely massive but it's all mountain. The places to build are already built upon.
British Columbia is absolutely massive but it's all mountain. The places to build are already built upon.
To be fair, there are huge flat expanses in the Vancouver metro area that have nothing but single-storey, single-family homes on them. It's not really the most efficient use of the space.
It's what people prefer to live in given options most of the time though. For all the benefits of living in a dense urban core with walkable everything a lot of people like the quieter suburbs. It's also that the story of "making it" usually involves having your own detached family single family house which pushes people to that as well.
I always want to push back against the narrative that people's natural state is to want a single family home. Out of control zoning makes single family detached homes the only possibility apart from some specially designated urban cores, so it can easily seem like people only want detached homes. It's easy to look at our current housing stock and think it's what people want, but it's the work of a small group of people enforcing their choices across decades of zoning. There are plenty of people who want a single family home and that's fine. What I'm not fine with is their choice being encoded into city law as the only choice.
There is also a knee-jerk reaction across north america to any density beyond single family homes automatically being glass and steel high rises that block the sun. What we really need is missing middle properties, like tri- and quad-plexes. Low and mid rise apartment buildings with plenty of 2, 3 and 4 bedroom units. A lot more density than we have in suburbs now, but not crowded or packed.
Montreal is one of the few cities in north america that actually has that missing middle housing. It's also the only metro region in Canada that has both mostly contained sprawl and been relatively unaffected by the housing crisis. This is not a coincidence since people have all sorts of choices about what type of housing to live in that fits their budget and lifestyle instead of ones forced by extremely limited zoning options.
There is also a knee-jerk reaction across north america to any density beyond single family homes automatically being glass and steel high rises that block the sun. What we really need is missing middle properties, like tri- and quad-plexes. Low and mid rise apartment buildings with plenty of 2, 3 and 4 bedroom units. A lot more density than we have in suburbs now, but not crowded or packed.
Montreal is one of the few cities in north america that actually has that missing middle housing. It's also the only metro region in Canada that has both mostly contained sprawl and been relatively unaffected by the housing crisis. This is not a coincidence since people have all sorts of choices about what type of housing to live in that fits their budget and lifestyle instead of ones forced by extremely limited zoning options.
> It's what people prefer to live in given options most of the time though.
I am sure many others prefer lower rent or not being homeless
I am sure many others prefer lower rent or not being homeless
I'm not sure it's possible to simply out build the ridiculous amounts of cash sloshing around in the real estate market from speculators and foreign investors using it as a way to move money out of their countries. Even in places with loose zoning rules that allow for almost any building to go up anywhere (eg parts of Texas) house prices are still spiking far faster than people's ability to afford them.
Yeah this is def the stuff that badly, badly needs to be redeveloped.
> Even small towns are well >$600k for rundown detached houses here.
Where is this? As an Albertan my experience isn't even that in the city.
Where is this? As an Albertan my experience isn't even that in the city.
There are lots of "small towns" in Canada where you can purchase a house for less than 200k CAD. Just not in Southern Ontario. Just like there are lots of places you can purchase a house in small town America just not on Long Island or in the 5 boroughs.
Most Americans still live in large metro areas, either in the cities themselves or the suburbs.
There’s this myth that america has all this land and space and that causes this or that, which is partially true, but the reason why Toronto is expensive has nothing to do with the fact that it’s very challenging to live in the northern reaches of the country. Canada has 1/10th the population of the US and fewer people than the single state of California. There’s plenty of space within the few major cities within the country.
For another reference, there are more people living in the New York and LA metro areas than in all of Canada.
There’s this myth that america has all this land and space and that causes this or that, which is partially true, but the reason why Toronto is expensive has nothing to do with the fact that it’s very challenging to live in the northern reaches of the country. Canada has 1/10th the population of the US and fewer people than the single state of California. There’s plenty of space within the few major cities within the country.
For another reference, there are more people living in the New York and LA metro areas than in all of Canada.
>SF and NYC are not good comparisons either. Yes, they are expensive and 90%+ of the country could never afford to live there—that part is the same—but Americans have so many more options. There are small- and medium-sized cities all over the US.
It's entirely possible in the US to rise to the top of most industries without moving to NYC, Chicago, or LA. It's not possible to do so in Canada without moving to Toronto, Montreal, or Vancouver (plus Calgary/Edmonton for energy).
This is a story familiar to every Canadian, and to many Australians and Britons:
Mid-career executive accepts job offer in the US in some place like Dallas, Phoenix, Atlanta, Oklahoma City, or Tampa. Is excited about the opportunity and the raise in salary, and curious about living in a different country, but a little nervous about moving to a "right wing Republican" state "without healthcare".
A few months in, the reports back to friends and family change. More and more mention of the "amazing" house they found in the suburbs with an outdoor pool (!) that is so much less expensive than in Toronto or Vancouver, the "fantastic" school the kids attend with sports teams and cheerleading and other afterschool activities, and—especially—how unbelievably cheap everything is at the supermarket, mall, and gas station.
That family is never moving back to Canada. This happens over and over again.
(Also, NYC/Chicago/LA are cheaper than Toronto/Vancouver, anyway. A Canadian expatriate in the US reported recently that her home in Fairfield County, Connecticut (very, very upscale NYC suburb) is cheaper than GTA.)
It's entirely possible in the US to rise to the top of most industries without moving to NYC, Chicago, or LA. It's not possible to do so in Canada without moving to Toronto, Montreal, or Vancouver (plus Calgary/Edmonton for energy).
This is a story familiar to every Canadian, and to many Australians and Britons:
Mid-career executive accepts job offer in the US in some place like Dallas, Phoenix, Atlanta, Oklahoma City, or Tampa. Is excited about the opportunity and the raise in salary, and curious about living in a different country, but a little nervous about moving to a "right wing Republican" state "without healthcare".
A few months in, the reports back to friends and family change. More and more mention of the "amazing" house they found in the suburbs with an outdoor pool (!) that is so much less expensive than in Toronto or Vancouver, the "fantastic" school the kids attend with sports teams and cheerleading and other afterschool activities, and—especially—how unbelievably cheap everything is at the supermarket, mall, and gas station.
That family is never moving back to Canada. This happens over and over again.
(Also, NYC/Chicago/LA are cheaper than Toronto/Vancouver, anyway. A Canadian expatriate in the US reported recently that her home in Fairfield County, Connecticut (very, very upscale NYC suburb) is cheaper than GTA.)
That is not true, cities in Alberta have observed very stable housing prices since 2014, and there is plenty infrastructure and space to build.
I don't think there are any US Cities where the price of a house or condo doubled to tripled during the pandemic. There is no where in NA where the price of a house is rising at approx 2k a week, The average price of a house in Toronto is predicted to rise by 100k this year. It isn't just Toronto anymore, actually Toronto is super affordable. The prices across the province especially in areas outside of Toronto that have been historically low have sky rocketed. King Township average price is like 2.6 million.
https://www.zolo.ca/toronto-real-estate/trends
Thank the Federal Gov/BoC for destroying the dream of ownership for millions.
https://www.zolo.ca/toronto-real-estate/trends
Thank the Federal Gov/BoC for destroying the dream of ownership for millions.
While I don't live in a big city, a neighbor of mine purchased their ranch for 700k pre-pandemic and have just offered it for sale three years later for 1.5 million so price doubling is not exclusive to Canada nor to "big cities".
To be fair, you showcase King, but King is a very affluent community and thanks to the 400 running through the middle of King Township, it is a bedroom community even for downtown Toronto. The homes for sale in King tend to be in the 3500 to 5000 sqft range and while they are super expensive, a 5000 sqft house, an hours drive from Manhattan, with a yard would cost as much or more in USD than a house in King for CAD.
You say this is a government / bank problem. Should the Feds (CA and/or USA) have kept interest rates high during COVID to keep house prices low?
To be fair, you showcase King, but King is a very affluent community and thanks to the 400 running through the middle of King Township, it is a bedroom community even for downtown Toronto. The homes for sale in King tend to be in the 3500 to 5000 sqft range and while they are super expensive, a 5000 sqft house, an hours drive from Manhattan, with a yard would cost as much or more in USD than a house in King for CAD.
You say this is a government / bank problem. Should the Feds (CA and/or USA) have kept interest rates high during COVID to keep house prices low?
Housing prices did double in most mid tier cities during the pandemic. Just not the big ones like NYC, SF, Seattle which were already sky high.
Housing prices doubled for many places on the US.
Taking it into perspective, CA real estate might be a good investment if you're rich, but it's pretty punishing if you cannot afford it.
Brampton Real Estate prices are outpacing Toronto.
Also, I remember 2015 Hong Kong and thinking it’s crazy that a small 400 sq ft flat would cost over 1 millions or avg persons income for 18 years. Fast forward now Toronto housing is pretty much at that point. Also keep in mind you get taxed upwards to 56% of your income if you make more than 220k
Also, I remember 2015 Hong Kong and thinking it’s crazy that a small 400 sq ft flat would cost over 1 millions or avg persons income for 18 years. Fast forward now Toronto housing is pretty much at that point. Also keep in mind you get taxed upwards to 56% of your income if you make more than 220k
> Canadian kids are forced to take thirteen years of (Quebec) French, so they already have a head start at getting fluent in the language of their new adoptive country.
Hahahaha. Ask how hard it is to integrate in France when you're from Québec, so someone who's not even speaking French natively? Good luck, you'd have better luck moving to Quebec City.
> Location-independent entrepreneur friends can buy a three-story chateau in the French countryside for less than the price of a single-detached house in a steeltown dumping ground like Hamilton.
Good luck maintaining that.
Hahahaha. Ask how hard it is to integrate in France when you're from Québec, so someone who's not even speaking French natively? Good luck, you'd have better luck moving to Quebec City.
> Location-independent entrepreneur friends can buy a three-story chateau in the French countryside for less than the price of a single-detached house in a steeltown dumping ground like Hamilton.
Good luck maintaining that.
Honestly, the "speaking French" part is overrated. Especially in Paris we have tons of immigrants from all over the (francophone) world and a sizable portion of them have an accent at least to us. Yet people won't look down systematically on you because you're foreign or speak with a foreign accent... And France French is much easier to pronounce.
> thirteen years of (Quebec) French
That’s like saying people learn (American) English. At least, from what I was told they don’t differentiate the two at the French schools here in SF.
> Ask how hard it is to integrate in France when you're from Québec, so someone who's not even speaking French natively? Good luck
People from Quebec told me France was a very welcoming place.
That’s like saying people learn (American) English. At least, from what I was told they don’t differentiate the two at the French schools here in SF.
> Ask how hard it is to integrate in France when you're from Québec, so someone who's not even speaking French natively? Good luck
People from Quebec told me France was a very welcoming place.
It’s not even true. They teach Parisian French (or Standard French) in Canada at schools outside Quebec. I did immersion for 12 years. I think its simply a practical choice: French from France has more standards (set by the Academie Francais), more materials (because it’s the international standard) and therefore more teachers.
In SF, they certainly teach Standard French. FWIW, I think that the differences are simply that Quebec uses a lot of old (like 17th Century) pronunciations, and a lot of distinct vocabulary, along with its own regional variations.
Consider learning Quebec French equivalent to teaching English exclusively by reading works from around the time of Shakespeare. You could probably get by but you need to adapt if you step out of that world. Walking around saying “thou” would get you strange looks for sure. We would read Quebec literature at school, but there was often new vocabulary.
In SF, they certainly teach Standard French. FWIW, I think that the differences are simply that Quebec uses a lot of old (like 17th Century) pronunciations, and a lot of distinct vocabulary, along with its own regional variations.
Consider learning Quebec French equivalent to teaching English exclusively by reading works from around the time of Shakespeare. You could probably get by but you need to adapt if you step out of that world. Walking around saying “thou” would get you strange looks for sure. We would read Quebec literature at school, but there was often new vocabulary.
Quebec French is different than metropolitan French, but not to the degree that modern English is to Shakespeare, that’s a pretty ludicrous comparison.
If you go from North America to the UK you’ll run into plenty of new vocabulary there too.
If you go from North America to the UK you’ll run into plenty of new vocabulary there too.
I said around the time of Shakespeare, not exclusively Shakespeare (which is essentially poetry). Perhaps “King James Bible” would be a better example. I don’t think it’s that ludicrous, since English hasn’t really changed that much notwithstanding vocabulary and some spelling.
I asked French and French Canadians colleagues over Slack about it. They had a good laugh. Apparently it’s true that French Canadians pronounce words in the pre-revolutionary way (so Royal French?).
I know enough French to hold basic conversations and other than a different accent I didn’t notice anything that different. I mean, not more pronounced than English from the UK or Texas. The French Canadians sounds a little bit like Swiss to me. They told me it should be impossible to disambiguate in writing (except when one uses Euros!).
I know enough French to hold basic conversations and other than a different accent I didn’t notice anything that different. I mean, not more pronounced than English from the UK or Texas. The French Canadians sounds a little bit like Swiss to me. They told me it should be impossible to disambiguate in writing (except when one uses Euros!).
If you do not know you’re learning French from Quebec, you’re learning French from France lol. They are very distinct dialects.
I am coming around to the opinion that the real estate market isn't out of control at all. The absolute complete opposite of the author here.
Doesnt make sense does it? But what if the underlying problem throughout the article? The overall PRICE of housing.
What if housing is only just a metric of the problem? Debt is money. Debt is generally speaking housing and transport. They will show the problem quickly.
What if it's the currency that's collapsing? https://tradingeconomics.com/canada/central-bank-balance-she...
https://tradingeconomics.com/canada/money-supply-m0
https://tradingeconomics.com/canada/money-supply-m3
These are often disregarded as not showing the whole story, but what if they are showing the whole story?
https://tradingeconomics.com/canada/private-debt-to-gdp
Canadians are 304% in private debt to gdp.
https://tradingeconomics.com/canada/government-debt-to-gdp
Canadian government debt has jumped remarkably, but they also haven't been tabling any budget and reporting on this debt anymore.
https://tradingeconomics.com/canada/government-debt
Yes you see that right, the basic income the Canadian government over covid basically increased debt by 50% in a single year?
Balance of trade has been negative since the financial crisis: https://tradingeconomics.com/canada/balance-of-trade
Lets not forget our subnational governments are also not reporting on their debt anymore.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontario_government_debt
What if the currency is in collapse? The governments would know it and their immediate action would be to stop reporting their financials? Obviously tremendous debt held by everyone and government is the cause.
Doesnt make sense does it? But what if the underlying problem throughout the article? The overall PRICE of housing.
What if housing is only just a metric of the problem? Debt is money. Debt is generally speaking housing and transport. They will show the problem quickly.
What if it's the currency that's collapsing? https://tradingeconomics.com/canada/central-bank-balance-she...
https://tradingeconomics.com/canada/money-supply-m0
https://tradingeconomics.com/canada/money-supply-m3
These are often disregarded as not showing the whole story, but what if they are showing the whole story?
https://tradingeconomics.com/canada/private-debt-to-gdp
Canadians are 304% in private debt to gdp.
https://tradingeconomics.com/canada/government-debt-to-gdp
Canadian government debt has jumped remarkably, but they also haven't been tabling any budget and reporting on this debt anymore.
https://tradingeconomics.com/canada/government-debt
Yes you see that right, the basic income the Canadian government over covid basically increased debt by 50% in a single year?
Balance of trade has been negative since the financial crisis: https://tradingeconomics.com/canada/balance-of-trade
Lets not forget our subnational governments are also not reporting on their debt anymore.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontario_government_debt
What if the currency is in collapse? The governments would know it and their immediate action would be to stop reporting their financials? Obviously tremendous debt held by everyone and government is the cause.
this is part of the issue but not the entirety. If it was just the currency that was collapsing you would see wages spiraling out of control as well.
i think, what we're seeing here is housing has been made nearly impossible to build by regulation and zoning. Also, large imbalances between where jobs are and where places to live are, exacerbate the issue immensely.
Over the course of the last decade, I've come to accept that things are the way they are because many many people want it that way. There is large scale support for ever increasing housing costs among the voting population. this is because most voters own real estate and they simply want to those values to go up and up forever, regardless of the consequences to the next generations and the future of humanity. I had noticed this taking place in the US but I've been seeing this phenomonen happening all over the world in the so called "first world".
i think, what we're seeing here is housing has been made nearly impossible to build by regulation and zoning. Also, large imbalances between where jobs are and where places to live are, exacerbate the issue immensely.
Over the course of the last decade, I've come to accept that things are the way they are because many many people want it that way. There is large scale support for ever increasing housing costs among the voting population. this is because most voters own real estate and they simply want to those values to go up and up forever, regardless of the consequences to the next generations and the future of humanity. I had noticed this taking place in the US but I've been seeing this phenomonen happening all over the world in the so called "first world".
I realize I'm likely in the minority, but my property value has gone up almost 100% since 2019, and I don't like it one bit. I'm going to be burned by property tax increases like everyone else. Even if I did sell, there's nowhere to move--and I'd be paying stupidly-inflated percentage-based real estate commissions on both transactions.
In CA you can have your cake and eat it too. My property values have gone up 30% just in the last year and yet, with Prop 13, my property taxes will only go up 2%.
can you imagine the long term ramifications of such a taxation policy? the guy who made 2 million $ in equity gains over the last 20 years is paying 5 times less property taxes than the poor schmuck with 0 equity gain who just bought the same exact house at 4 times the cost. sure they're both paying a lot of property taxes but the one who just bought into the system, is paying a lot lot more.
can you imagine the long term ramifications of such a taxation policy? the guy who made 2 million $ in equity gains over the last 20 years is paying 5 times less property taxes than the poor schmuck with 0 equity gain who just bought the same exact house at 4 times the cost. sure they're both paying a lot of property taxes but the one who just bought into the system, is paying a lot lot more.
If you're in Canada (or at least Ontario) huge upticks in property values across a city don't result in higher property taxes. Municipalities set their budget and then divide by the real estate value to arrive at each lot's property tax (the actual formula is more complex, but that's the basic concept, plus MPAC values lag way behind actual sales). When everyone's property goes up by the same amount no one's taxes increase.
It's still a very bad thing property values have gone up so much. This isn't free money; the cost is being extracted from young people and new immigrants trying to enter the market and it's turning our economy into a giant real estate shell game.
It's still a very bad thing property values have gone up so much. This isn't free money; the cost is being extracted from young people and new immigrants trying to enter the market and it's turning our economy into a giant real estate shell game.
In Toronto, commercial real estate carries the largest property tax burden - single family houses are the lowest in the entire province.
One of the most important realizations that you have to make as an adult is that there are no conspiracies. If there is one billionaire supposedly doing something on his own behind your back you can bet that there are millions of people who are doing the same thing and think it is perfectly okay.
People complain about black rock buying everything up but guess what, regular homeowners are in it for the speculation as well and they vote in a way that gives black rock outsized power because they want their own slice.
People complain about black rock buying everything up but guess what, regular homeowners are in it for the speculation as well and they vote in a way that gives black rock outsized power because they want their own slice.
Welp, though the assumption "most voters own real estate" is becoming less and less true everyday.
If you believe 'The currency is in collapse,' then I suggest you take out as much leverage as you can have to your name (Maybe even raise capital from institutions using your above diligence) and do a Soros-Style short.
Here's the playbook: https://theeconreview.com/2018/10/16/how-soros-broke-the-bri...
Good luck.
Here's the playbook: https://theeconreview.com/2018/10/16/how-soros-broke-the-bri...
Good luck.
I actually do believe the Canadian currency is in collapse and it absolutely changed my behavior (bought assets/stock in other countries, got a mortgage at 5% down, vs 20% down, other hard assets)
I'm telling you if you have that much conviction, then you can profit it off that WAY more than you currently are with some simple financial instruments.
But as always this is not investment advice, because I disagree with the premise.
But as always this is not investment advice, because I disagree with the premise.
It's possible to have conviction but recognize the possibility being wrong or that outside events can have an impact. With financial instruments, it's also possible to run into market-timing issues and outsized risk to reward.
On the other hand, it's easy to bet on hard assets (like real estate) and taking on debt when inflation is so high and rates are so low. It has the added benefit of not being sophisticated, requiring neither a finance nor an accounting degree.
On the other hand, it's easy to bet on hard assets (like real estate) and taking on debt when inflation is so high and rates are so low. It has the added benefit of not being sophisticated, requiring neither a finance nor an accounting degree.
Conviction is literally 'firmly holding a belief or opinion.' If you firmly believe that currency is collapsing and your response is to buy a home, then you're leaving a bunch of money on the table and potentially not profiting from that at all.
If you think that interest rates are low and housing has a lot of reasons to inflate going forward, then I think we agree you're acting rationally, but that has almost nothing to do with 'currency collapse.'
If you think that interest rates are low and housing has a lot of reasons to inflate going forward, then I think we agree you're acting rationally, but that has almost nothing to do with 'currency collapse.'
If you are of the persuasion that western currencies are collapsing, what would you pair the canadian dollar with for your trade?
Soros paired the GBP with USD because the bank of England was having a difficult time defending the pound. The USD was not also at risk. It was completely unrelated to the situation happening in England. But if both the GBP and USD fell, Soros would not have made a profit.
Soros paired the GBP with USD because the bank of England was having a difficult time defending the pound. The USD was not also at risk. It was completely unrelated to the situation happening in England. But if both the GBP and USD fell, Soros would not have made a profit.
Lol whichever currency/asset you plan to use to measure your wealth in the future.
You're right, Soros borrowed pounds and sold them for dollars because he wanted more dollars. If you think CAD and USD are both going to collapse, then maybe think about the joys of your day-to-day life (coffee, heat, clean water) and use that as the other side.
It is very unlikely that USD collapses on a human life-scale without major disruptions in those supply chains.
You're right, Soros borrowed pounds and sold them for dollars because he wanted more dollars. If you think CAD and USD are both going to collapse, then maybe think about the joys of your day-to-day life (coffee, heat, clean water) and use that as the other side.
It is very unlikely that USD collapses on a human life-scale without major disruptions in those supply chains.
Raising interest rates wont be far off if it is in collapse.
>Raising interest rates wont be far off if it is in collapse.
All I can do is point to the failed mandate.
https://tradingeconomics.com/canada/inflation-cpi
https://tradingeconomics.com/canada/interest-rate
All I can do is point to the failed mandate.
https://tradingeconomics.com/canada/inflation-cpi
https://tradingeconomics.com/canada/interest-rate
>If you believe 'The currency is in collapse,' then I suggest you take out as much leverage as you can have to your name (Maybe even raise capital from institutions using your above diligence) and do a Soros-Style short.
Literally everyone I know is doing this. Crazy mortgages and all money into inflationary resistant assets. Gold, Crypto, etc.
Literally everyone I know is doing this. Crazy mortgages and all money into inflationary resistant assets. Gold, Crypto, etc.
1) Wow you have really hardcore friends, I love it.
2) I hope they realize that in Jan-22, Bitcoin's inflation rate was like 30%+
The housing market is dictated by fiat. Both supply (lending) and demand (building) are a function of government regulation.
I’m moving to California later this year and decided to sell. Similar properties are going for $1.2 million. Buyers are waving all conditions. My realtor tells me most places have 20+ blind bids and he hasn’t had a buyer add an inspection condition since the pandemic.
If you look at the sales data it makes no sense whatsoever. Sales prices are all over the place. Huge swings of hundreds of thousands of dollars for similar properties.
I’m making more money sitting in this house than I do at my well paid tech job.